Re: Spin Cycle: Trump Takes On NBC Anchor In Combative "Meet The Press" Interview

On May 5, 2025 at 1:30:46 AM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:

Welker went on to challenge Trump's actions regarding certain political
adversaries-- in particular those who were directly involved in prosecuting
the legal cases against him-- asking whether he was making matters worse by
stripping their security clearances.

I've never understood this "keeping a security clearance" thing after leaving
the government in the first place.

First, any security clearance, at any level, carries with it a "need to know"
requirement. So just because you have a SECRET clearance doesn't mean you get
access to everything marked SECRET. You also have to have a bona fide need to
know that information to perform your job. Since these retired officials are
nothing but media talking heads or think tank employees now, they don't *have*
a government job anymore, so they certainly don't have any bona fide need to
know classified information. Given that, it seems that their clearance would
be essentially useless, since anyone giving them classified information
without them having a need to know would be committing a crime.

Second, all clearances of SECRET and above have a 5-year renewal requirement
or they expire automatically. The renewal requires an updated background
investigation for the position the person currently occupies. Since all these
people no longer work for the government, they would fail the background
investigation for not holding a current government position, and the clearance
would automatically lapse. My TOP SECRET-SCI clearance officially lapsed this
past January. I retired in 2020, so for the last five years, I still had my
clearance, but not anymore.

There's no justifiable reason to maintain an ongoing  generalized clearance
after leaving government service 'just because'. And let's be honest here, the
real reason these guys want them is as a status symbol or to land them some
cushy job with a government contractor or think tank. My response to that is,
too bad. Let them get the job first, then they can submit an SF-86 just like
everyone else does.